Nintendo and The Pokémon Company File Patent Infringement Lawsuit Against Pocketpair
Nintendo and The Pokémon Company have announced the filing of a patent infringement lawsuit in Tokyo against Pocketpair, the developers of the game Palworld. The lawsuit claims that Palworld infringes on multiple patent rights held by the companies.
Palworld has drawn comparisons to the Pokémon franchise, as players catch creatures by weakening them and trapping them in Pal Spheres, which resemble Poké Balls. Fans have noted significant similarities in design between the creatures in Palworld and Pokémon. Moreover, the game has faced scrutiny from Nintendo for player-created mods that incorporate actual Pokémon, further drawing attention to potential intellectual property conflicts.
Interestingly, the lawsuit alleges patent violations rather than copyright ones, suggesting the issue may revolve around game mechanics rather than creature design. Palworld was released in January and quickly achieved commercial success. In its first month, it sold over 12 million copies and became Microsoft’s largest third-party Game Pass launch.
In response to the lawsuit, Pocketpair issued a statement on Thursday, acknowledging they were unaware of the specific patents in question but expressing their intent to investigate the claims. The company emphasized it would continue to improve the game despite the need to divert resources to address the legal matters. A recent patch addressing bug fixes was also mentioned.
The gaming community has voiced strong support for Palworld online. Some users criticized Nintendo, suggesting that larger companies should focus on improving their own products rather than targeting smaller developers. Others supported Nintendo’s actions, highlighting the company’s established history of protecting its intellectual property.
In past interviews, Pocketpair’s CEO, Takuro Mizobe, has denied any intentional infringement on other companies’ intellectual property. Meanwhile, Nintendo reiterated its commitment to defending its intellectual property rights, emphasizing ongoing vigilance to protect its established brands.
The lawsuit underscores the longstanding issues companies face regarding intellectual property, and the outcome may set important precedents for the industry.
